"Projection systems are not perfect models, and as the White Sox have shown, there are important variables that are not being measured as well as they could be."

I'm not someone who believes that the PECOTA people are somehow biased against the Sox, I just think that a system like this is not suited to predict whole team outcomes. Even if they started taking into consideration the White Sox, frankly, unbelievable training staff, there are always going to be other variables that pop up that can't all be accounted for.

The writer himself says that BP has been particularly and significantly wrong when it comes to the White Sox. He then proceeds to tell us why. The reasons given are exactly why whole team projections are really just for fun, and not very useful, as opposed to specific player projections. There are too many variables to project an entire team's success as anything other than a fun little exercise. Meaningless, and not useful to anyone. Not even gamblers, really.

He wasn't bashing the system, he was explaining away the singular long-time inconsistency in the model.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sullythered

From the fangraphs piece:

"Projection systems are not perfect models, and as the White Sox have shown, there are important variables that are not being measured as well as they could be."

I'm not someone who believes that the PECOTA people are somehow biased against the Sox, I just think that a system like this is not suited to predict whole team outcomes. Even if they started taking into consideration the White Sox, frankly, unbelievable training staff, there are always going to be other variables that pop up that can't all be accounted for.

But the model works well with other teams. Generally, large discrepancies are easily explained, usually by players not on the roster having an impact. There is no need to account for future trades or unexpected callups in the model. They are not rating the farm system, bank account of the team, or the general manager. They are rating the players on the roster and nothing more. As a system, it works really really well.

He wasn't bashing the system, he was explaining away the singular long-time inconsistency in the model.

But the model works well with other teams. Generally, large discrepancies are easily explained, usually by players not on the roster having an impact. There is no need to account for future trades or unexpected callups in the model. They are not rating the farm system, bank account of the team, or the general manager. They are rating the players on the roster and nothing more. As a system, it works really really well.

The bottom line is the PECOTA team projections don't outperform "experts" predictions, which usually don't outperform random message board predictions, as far as team W-L results. We all know who has the most talented teams, that's really no secret. In fact, if someone where to tell you what Mike Trout would have done last season before the season started, what kind of odds do you think you could have received if you bet Oakland would finish 5 games ahead of the Angels? There will always be a few surprises and a few dissappointments. Their system is fine, and every team in baseball reads their work, but there is a reason they still play the games.

Who has argued this point at all? Just because BP and PECOTA aren't 100% perfect all the god damn time doesn't mean they still aren't the best.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sullythered

From the fangraphs piece:

"Projection systems are not perfect models, and as the White Sox have shown, there are important variables that are not being measured as well as they could be."

I'm not someone who believes that the PECOTA people are somehow biased against the Sox, I just think that a system like this is not suited to predict whole team outcomes. Even if they started taking into consideration the White Sox, frankly, unbelievable training staff, there are always going to be other variables that pop up that can't all be accounted for.

Right, which is why anyone who understands how these things works knows their limitations in predicting a full, 162-game down to every game. That's impossible. The only people who really put a lot of stock into PECOTA and other stats-based models are the nimrods who post **** like "ERG, SEE, NUMBERZ ARE FOR HOMERSEXUALS. 7 GAMES DIFFERENTS BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA"

Right, which is why anyone who understands how these things works knows their limitations in predicting a full, 162-game down to every game. That's impossible. The only people who really put a lot of stock into PECOTA and other stats-based models are the nimrods who post **** like "ERG, SEE, NUMBERZ ARE FOR HOMERSEXUALS. 7 GAMES DIFFERENTS BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA"

And this thread is about a projection of a full team's 162 game season, not of an individual player. The limitations are the most important thing we can examine here.

And this thread is about a projection of a full team's 162 game season, not of an individual player. The limitations are the most important thing we can examine here.

Right and it's only been blown out of proportion by the fervent anti-intellectual crowd whose hell bent on beating a drum and making sure everyone knows that BP has been "so wrong" about the Sox in the past whereas any sensible person would have looked at their projections, said "77 wins? Wow, that sucks," shrugged their shoulders, and gone on with their day.

But the model works well with other teams. Generally, large discrepancies are easily explained, usually by players not on the roster having an impact. There is no need to account for future trades or unexpected callups in the model. They are not rating the farm system, bank account of the team, or the general manager. They are rating the players on the roster and nothing more. As a system, it works really really well.

We're not talking about "other teams." This is about the White Sox, and PECOTA's inability to project their seasons accurately. As I said, the fangraphs article does a nice job showing a major flaw in their system, and why the Sox are the consistent outlier. They are just way better at keeping their players healthy than any other team in the league. PECOTA does not take that into account. It's not, at all, about players not currently on the roster. It's about keeping their current players on the roster.

Right and it's only been blown out of proportion by the fervent anti-intellectual crowd whose hell bent on beating a drum and making sure everyone knows that BP has been "so wrong" about the Sox in the past whereas any sensible person would have looked at their projections, said "77 wins? Wow, that sucks," shrugged their shoulders, and gone on with their day.

You don't find it interesting that our favorite team is the team that PECOTA most consistently gets wrong? It's worth talking about, at least.

Right and it's only been blown out of proportion by the fervent anti-intellectual crowd whose hell bent on beating a drum and making sure everyone knows that BP has been "so wrong" about the Sox in the past whereas any sensible person would have looked at their projections, said "77 wins? Wow, that sucks," shrugged their shoulders, and gone on with their day.

What is anti-intellectual about noticing results that have been pretty far off in the past and thinking they may continue to be off now?

The only people who really put a lot of stock into PECOTA and other stats-based models are the nimrods who post **** like "ERG, SEE, NUMBERZ ARE FOR HOMERSEXUALS. 7 GAMES DIFFERENTS BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA"

Gee, I must have missed those posts.

__________________

"Nellie Fox, that little son of a gun, was always on base and was a great hit-and-run man. He sprayed hits all over."
Yogi Berra in the New York Sunday News (July 12, 1970)

We're not talking about "other teams." This is about the White Sox, and PECOTA's inability to project their seasons accurately. As I said, the fangraphs article does a nice job showing a major flaw in their system, and why the Sox are the consistent outlier. They are just way better at keeping their players healthy than any other team in the league. PECOTA does not take that into account. It's not, at all, about players not currently on the roster. It's about keeping their current players on the roster.

No, you're only talking about the White Sox. And that you key in on that shows exactly why you're not the person to be debating the merits of the system.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sullythered

You don't find it interesting that our favorite team is the team that PECOTA most consistently gets wrong? It's worth talking about, at least.

No. The article did a really good job of explaining that away. It's not interesting, really. Nor is it reason to assume the White Sox have anything but extremely long odds of winning 90 games.

We are on White Sox Interactive, in the Sox Clubhouse forum. We're talking about the Sox here.

And explaining a flaw in the system does not explain it "away."

Then that is taking a *very* shortsighted look at a model that necessarily requires a review of all its predictions and numbers across all of baseball to evaluate. You're basically admitting to cherry-picking.